Dairy herd welfare a must for the cow, the farmer, and the consumer - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dairy herd welfare – a must for the cow, the farmer, and the consumer

JENNIFER VAN OS

Outline

 Who am I? How did I get here? What is my goal?  What is animal welfare science?  How do different stakeholders view animal welfare?  What are some of the current and future considerations and priorities for dairy cattle welfare?

Outline

 Who am I? How did I get here? What is my goal?  What is animal welfare science?  How do different stakeholders view animal welfare?  What are some of the current and future considerations and priorities for dairy cattle welfare?

Animal-lover with little knowledge about food animal production

Animal-lover with little knowledge about food animal production Assistant Professor & Extension Specialist in Animal Welfare

2008 California ballot proposition

2008 California ballot proposition

Consumers / Voting citizens

Farm animals are treated poorly?!

Activists

state ballot initiatives to regulate farm animal housing

1988: Massachusetts 71% NO 2016: Massachusetts 78% YES 2002: Florida 55% Yes 2006: Arizona 62% Yes 2008: California 64% Yes 2009: Ohio 64% Yes

Consumers / Voting citizens Activists

“Animals deserve humane treatment!” “Yes, absolutely!”

2008 California ballot proposition

Consumers / Voting citizens

Farming = business = profit motivated…?

I learned that the issues aren’t so black & white

“Corporate Social Responsibility” is changing food production

Companies

Animal welfare: necessary for the social license to continue producing food in the future

Consumers / Voting citizens

Can we feel good about our food?

Producers Consumers / citizens Companies

Animal welfare science can help with decision making by bringing an understanding of what’s important for the animal

Scientists Lawmakers

Outline

 Who am I? How did I get here? What is my goal?  What is animal welfare science?  How do different stakeholders view animal welfare?  What are some of the current and future considerations and priorities for dairy cattle welfare?

How do we study animal welfare?

Biological science: understanding the cow Social science: understanding people

How do we study animal welfare?

Biological science: understanding the cow Social science: understanding people

State of individual animal Good welfare Poor welfare

What is animal welfare?

Animal welfare science looks at the state of the animal – it’s outcome-based (facility-type & farm-size neutral)

body nature mind What is important for animal welfare?

Biological function (bodily health) Psychological state (mental health) Natural living (behavioral health)

Fraser et al. 1997. Anim. Welf. 6:187-205

• 1. Preference testing: “voting” with their feet
• 2. Motivation testing: asking them to “pay” to show how

much they care about something

I spend more time with “X” than “Y” because I prefer “X” “X” is really important to me, so I’m willing to work hard to get it!

What’s a “behavioral need”? How can we ask cows what matters to them?

What is important for animal welfare?

Biological function

• Health
• Performance

Psychological state

• + vs. – emotional response or state

Natural living

• Behavioral needs met
• Lack of abnormal behavior

body nature mind

Fraser et al 1997, 2008

body nature mind Cage-free aviaries vs. battery cages

+ better leg bone strength – more keel bone damage – more severe foot lesions – double mortality rate – more pain – more fear + less frustration? + freedom of movement + natural behaviors – aggression – cannibalism

Measuring animal welfare

Resource-based Animal-based Characteristics of: environment animal Provides info about: risk factors &

• pportunities

animal’s state indirect direct

Outline

 Who am I? How did I get here? What is my goal?  What is animal welfare science?  How do different stakeholders view animal welfare?  What are some of the current and future considerations and priorities for dairy cattle welfare?

How do we study animal welfare?

Biological science: understanding the cow Social science: understanding people

Today’s discussion: mostly US + Canada context, with some perspectives from Finland and elsewhere in Europe

Non-ag consumers Producers

“Consumers today don’t understand how their food is produced. Maybe we need to tell our story better so they will learn the facts and accept what we do.” “yes and no…”

Transparency is critical, but insufficient

knowledge about dairy production practices increased (education worked to convey facts)

Ventura et al. 2016. PLoS ONE 11:e0154733.

perceptions of dairy production practices did not necessarily improve (education did not always improve attitudes)

Ventura et al. 2016. PLoS ONE 11:e0154733.

32% became more critical

Educational farm visit had variable effects

• n people’s perceptions of welfare

44% no change 24% had improved perceptions of welfare

Non-ag consumers Ventura et al. 2016. PLoS ONE 11:e0154733.

Producers Consumers

What values are shared vs. prioritized differently?

body nature mind

Decision makers

The Five Freedoms

1) Freedom from hunger or thirst 2) Freedom from discomfort 3) Freedom from pain, injury or disease 4) Freedom to express (most) normal behavior 5) Freedom from fear and distress

body nature mind

Current form proposed by the Farm Animal Welfare Council of the UK

Decision makers

Biological functioning: high priority for producers

“Provision of adequate supply, such as food and water, together with good health care, makes good welfare”

Producers (focus group) De Greef et al. 2005. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 19:57-66.

body

Biological functioning: consumers place high value too

 nutrition  health  lack of injury

Non-ag consumers

body

BEFORE farm tour, 72% of visitors had concerns about bodily health

Ventura et al. 2016. PLoS ONE 11:e0154733.

Perceptions improved after farm visit when values relating to biological functioning were supported

body

Producers Consumers

24% had improved perceptions of welfare

 Care  Nutrition  Hygiene  Space

Ventura et al. 2016. PLoS ONE 11:e0154733.

Freedom from injury

• r disease

Biological functioning: decision makers also prioritize

body

Decision makers

Different stakeholders agree on importance

Producers Consumers On the same page

body

Cardoso et al. 2016. J. Dairy Sci. 99:1663-1671, Ventura et al. 2015. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 28:109-126, von Keyserlingk et al. 2013. J. Dairy Sci. 96:5405-5425

Future goal (medium-term, ≤20 yrs):  rates of lameness, transition cow disease, calf morbidity

Decision makers

The public expects animals to have good health, but also other things as well…

Consumers

 nutrition  health  lack of injury

Producers

“That’s necessary, but insufficient”

body

Psychological well-being: decision makers

 Freedom from hunger, thirst, discomfort, pain, fear, distress  Avoid mishandling/abuse  Minimize pain: lameness, injuries, procedures (dehorning)

mind

Cardoso et al. 2016. J. Dairy Sci. 99:1663-1671, Ventura et al. 2015. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 28:109-126, von Keyserlingk et al. 2013. J. Dairy Sci. 96:5405-5425

Decision makers

Psychological well-being: consumers

Non-ag consumers

mind

Rauch & Sharp, 2005

“Farm animals should be protected from feeling pain” Routine practices should be done with pain control

Psychological well-being: N. Am. producers

Producers

Prioritize reducing chronically painful conditions, like lameness

mind

Some use pain control for dehorning calves

Undercover activist video released January 2019

Activists

Psychological well-being: EU producers

Producers

mind

 No pain  No stress

Different stakeholders have some shared values

Producers Consumers

mind Goal (immediate term): follow best practices established by research for managing pain and stress  “easy win” for public perception

Cardoso et al. 2016. J. Dairy Sci. 99:1663-1671, Ventura et al. 2015. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 28:109-126, von Keyserlingk et al. 2013. J. Dairy Sci. 96:5405-5425, von Keyserlingk & Weary 2017. J. Dairy Sci. 100:10432-10444

Decision makers

Behavioral well-being: decision makers

Freedom to express (most) normal behaviors

nature

Decision makers

Behavioral well-being: producers

Producers

Natural environment (daylight,

• utdoor access), behavior
• pportunities, space… Should these

really be a big priority?

nature

Psychological well-being: producers

Producers

nature

 freedom to move

Psychological well-being: producers

Producers

nature

“I think society values access to pasture…”

Citizens

“… and this will become increasingly important in the future”

Behavioral well-being: consumers

 behavior opportunities  outdoor access  “buddies”

Non-ag consumers

nature

BEFORE farm tour, 66% of visitors had concerns about natural living

Ventura et al. 2016. PLoS ONE 11:e0154733.

Perceptions worsened after farm visit when values relating to natural living were not satisfied

Producers Consumers

• space?
• pasture?
• cow-calf

separation?

nature

32% became more critical

Ventura et al. 2016. PLoS ONE 11:e0154733.

Producers Consumers

Stakeholders’ priorities differ more in this area

Don’t always see eye-to-eye

• n how to prioritize…

nature

…but there is opportunity to find common ground Decision makers

Producers

Stakeholders’ priorities differ more in this area

nature

Cardoso et al. 2016. J. Dairy Sci. 99:1663-1671, Ventura et al. 2015. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 28:109-126, von Keyserlingk et al. 2013. J. Dairy Sci. 96:5405-5425, von Keyserlingk & Weary 2017. J. Dairy Sci. 100:10432-10444

Future goal (within a few decades): Close the gap with public expectations  increase behavioral opportunities

Consumers Decision makers

Outline

 Who am I? How did I get here? What is my goal?  What is animal welfare science?  How do different stakeholders view animal welfare?  What are some of the current and future considerations and priorities for dairy cattle welfare?

Consumers Producers

“We take care of our animals, and [in return] they take care of us” Are animals a means to an end?

Some messages can backfire…

Producers

“Our cows are producing well, so they must not be stressed, and their welfare is good”

…plus, production and welfare don’t always have a causal relationship

Sometimes, but not always… For example: pain control for dehorning

Some more goals for the present and future (within the next few decades) – calves

Outcomes:   morbidity rates   opportunities for social interactions

Cardoso et al. 2016. J. Dairy Sci. 99:1663-1671, Ventura et al. 2015. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 28:109-126, von Keyserlingk et al. 2013. J. Dairy Sci. 96:5405-5425, von Keyserlingk & Weary 2017. J. Dairy Sci. 100:10432-10444

body nature mind

Some of the factors to consider to help reduce calf morbidity

Outcomes:   morbidity rates   opportunities for social interactions Inputs:  Ventilation (clean air)  Set them up for success to use energy for growth:  Prevent cold stress  Dry bedding  Feed (quantity + quality)

Ventilation = air exchange

Goal:  remove dirty, contaminated air  bring in fresh air  ≥ 4x/hour

Nordlund & Halbach. 2019. VCNA 35:29-45.

Positive-pressure tubes assist in directing air without creating a draft (to avoid chilling the calves)

Give the calf the right tools so she doesn’t waste energy to keep warm

 Bedding (ideally straw) deep enough to completely cover the hind legs so the “nest” keeps the calf warm  Feed sufficient quantity & quality of milk to give the calf energy to stay warm, fight off disease, and grow!

Nordlund & Halbach. 2019. VCNA 35:29-45.

Some of the factors to consider to increase

• pportunities for calf social behavior

Outcomes:  Reduce morbidity rates   opportunities for social interactions

Cardoso et al. 2016. J. Dairy Sci. 99:1663-1671, Ventura et al. 2015. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 28:109-126, von Keyserlingk et al. 2013. J. Dairy Sci. 96:5405-5425, von Keyserlingk & Weary 2017. J. Dairy Sci. 100:10432-10444

Arrangements:  Current: pens for pairs

• r groups of calves

 Future: regular calf + dam/nurse interaction?

Some goals for the present and future (within the next few decades) – older cattle

Outcomes:   lameness & transition-related diseases (painful)   opportunities for movement/exercise   opportunities for many important behaviors

Cardoso et al. 2016. J. Dairy Sci. 99:1663-1671, Ventura et al. 2015. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 28:109-126, von Keyserlingk et al. 2013. J. Dairy Sci. 96:5405-5425, von Keyserlingk & Weary 2017. J. Dairy Sci. 100:10432-10444

body nature mind

Some of the factors to consider

Outcomes:   lameness & transition-related diseases (painful)   opportunities for movement/exercise   opportunities for many important behaviors Factors (inter-linked):   comfortable lying   unnecessary standing on hard surfaces   heat stress   stocking density (freestalls)  exercise (tie-stalls)

Why does she do that?!?

Van Os, Goldstein, Weary, von Keyserlingk., in preparation

• When heifers are first introduced to freestalls:

lying time  alley lying 

• 54% of Norwegian farms reported having cows who refuse to lie in stalls
• Stalls can work well, but they don’t follow the cow’s natural behavior
• Open packs (indoors or outdoors) or pasture can be alternatives

Van Os et al., in preparation; O’Connell et al., 1993; Kjaestad & Myren, 2001; Kjaestad & Simensen, 2001; von Keyserlingk et al., 2011

77% of heifers in our study chose to lie down in the alley at first

Cows prefer to be outside… AND inside

See also: Charlton & Rutter, 2017; von Keyserlingk et al 2017

Cows are motivated to go outside… BUT their preference for pasture vs. the barn depends on the context

Legrand et al. 2009. JDS 92:3651-3658.

Lying time decreases with heat stress

See also: Chen et al 2016; Legrand et al. 2011; Overton et al. 2002

Chen et al., 2013 J. Dairy Sci. 96:5035-5045

When cows are outside in warm weather, they want the benefits of shade

See also: Schütz et al., 2008, 2009; Tucker et al. 2008

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Sprinklers vs. Shade Ambient vs. Shade Ambient vs. Sprinklers Preference (%) un Sprinklers (no shade) Shade No shade Shade

Cows are motivated to seek shade. AND they prefer shade compared to the sun, even when cooled with water sprinklers

Schütz et al. 2011. JDS::94:273-283.

When cows are indoors in warm weather, they benefit from supplemental cooling

Van Os, Mondaca, et al. in preparation

Cows in the mechanically ventilated barn stayed cooler, even though they were higher producing

When cows are indoors in warm weather, they benefit from supplemental cooling

Showers further cooled the cows

See also: Chen et al. 2013, 2016

Van Os, Mondaca, et al. in preparation

Behavioral well-being: some of the factors to consider

Outcomes:   lameness & transition-related diseases (painful)   opportunities for movement/exercise   opportunities for many important behaviors

Cardoso et al. 2016. J. Dairy Sci. 99:1663-1671, Ventura et al. 2015. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 28:109-126, von Keyserlingk et al. 2013. J. Dairy Sci. 96:5405-5425, von Keyserlingk & Weary 2017. J. Dairy Sci. 100:10432-10444

Examples:  Grooming behavior  Outdoor access  Choices in the environment

McConnachie et al. 2018. Biol. Lett. 14: 20180303

Grooming is not just an “enrichment,” but an important behavioral need

Marshfield Agricultural Research Station, Wisconsin

Cows are as motivated to use a brush as they are to obtain fresh feed Naïve heifers use simple brushes within <4 minutes of first exposure

Van Os, Goldstein, Weary, von Keyserlingk, in preparation

“Contrafreeloading” – cattle choose to put in effort

Beef heifers pushed heavy gate to access hay, even though same hay was freely available in adjacent, open feed bunk! Van Os et al. 2018 PLoS ONE 13:e0193109

“Agency” – having choices – can be good for welfare

• Choice of indoor-outdoor access
• AMS: opportunity to choose own schedule?

Legrand et al. 2009. JDS 92:3651-3658.

Take-home messages

• 1. Animal welfare = outcomes about health, performance,

+ psychological & behavioral well-being

• 2. Research in animal welfare can help advance

discussions around expectations for animal care

body nature mind

Take-home messages

• 3. Animal welfare is an important component of

sustainability and the social license to produce food

• 4. Goal: continuous improvement toward meeting

public expectations  rates of lameness, disease  behavioral opportunities

@AWSUWM Animal Welfare Science at UW-Madison Jennifer Van Os jvanos@wisc.edu www.DairyAnimalWelfare.org